Gerontion, by T.S. Eliot

[Amicus Dei of [FoG]]

In English, we're being required to read some poems... The first two we've done so far are by T.S. Eliot. "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" and "Gerontion."
Now let me say first that I don't really like poetry. If you want to say something, just say it.
But back to the point... I'm working on "Gerontion" right now.
When I first started reading, I realized about 1/3 of the way through that I had started to completely ignore it and just glance at the words as if reading. Obviously I had no idea what was going on.

Now the thing that bothers me about poetry is this:
I think I understand it, but I can and will NEVER be sure. So I don't know whether I know what the author was trying to say.

I finished the thing (only having to read again the part 1/3 through), and managed to come up with some ideas... Honestly, I think they're either right on or farfetched.

Either this guy is imagining at the end of his life the beginning of the eternal life promised by Christ, or I don't have any idea what's going on.
It seems that the old man is questioning whether or not he's going to receive that promise, and perhaps is getting worried by the end and attempting to plead with God because he realizes that he's lost.

Also, I have this inkling that the title is a combination of titles of books from the Bible, such as GEnesis, chRONicles, and revelaTION.

Of course, the problem is that I'm supposed to write a commentary on this and speculate stuff about it, but somehow I'm supposed to avoid inaccurate information, in spite of the obvious fact that it's impossible for me to determine what T.S. Eliot is saying.

 

[Durruck]

Poetry can be extremely difficult to decipher. There is generally a lot of imagery and allegory going on that if you miss a reference, it trashes your understanding.

It's definitely a LONG way from, "See Spot. See Spot run." But for a reason. It's meant to tease the mind, to give your brain a workout, parting from the ordinary speech patterns and sentence structures, and descriptive methods. In short, a lot of poetry is just music without the instruments. Have you ever looked at most song lyrics? They would fail as an essay, yet when you understand the references, what the muse is, it all clicks together.

A great example is this song I have stuck in my head: Everything by Lifehouse:

Find me here
And speak to me
I want to feel you
I need to hear you
You are the light
That's leading me to the place
Where I find peace again

You are the strength
That keeps me walking
You are the hope
That keeps me trusting
You are the light to my soul
You are my purpose
You're everything

And how can I stand here with you
And not be moved by you
Would you tell me how could it be
Any better than this

You calm the storms
And you give me rest
You hold me in your hands
You won't let me fall
You steal my heart
When you take my breath away
Would you take me in take me deeper now

And how can I stand here with you
And not be moved by you
Would you tell me how could it be
Any better than this

And how can I stand here with you
And not be moved by you
Would you tell me how could it be
Any better than this

Cause you're all I want
You're all I need
You're everything, everything
You're all I want
You're all I need
You're everything, everything
You're all I want
You're all I need
You're everything, everything
You're all I want
You're all I need
Everything, everything

If you were to read on their forums, find videos on YouTube, etc... most people think this is a love song to his girlfriend. Because they misunderstand the target of a single word - "you" - they miss the meaning of the entire song. They miss the muse, and the rest is wasted.

So the fact that you're not sure if you know what Eliot meant? I'm not surprised. It takes a room full of scholars to get all the meanings from authors like Shakespere, and his stuff has been around for hundreds of years. Look at the Bible - Song of Songs has been around for thousands of years. I bet there are a TON of references that we (meaning all of humanity) just miss.

 

[Durruck]

btw, good job picking up the beginning, middle, and end chapters of the Bible being used as the title. Impressive catch.

 

[Odale]

Now the thing that bothers me about poetry is this:
I think I understand it, but I can and will NEVER be sure. So I don't know whether I know what the author was trying to say.

When you have to wrack your brain and sit and think about what a poem is trying to convey, that tells me you read it correctly.

You should read The Lottery by Shirley Jackson. It's story line is pretty straight forward, but if you begin to think about the meaning behind it... you'll be sitting down for a while.

If you google 'The Lottery', it's pretty much the only thing that comes up.

Of course, the problem is that I'm supposed to write a commentary on this and speculate stuff about it, but somehow I'm supposed to avoid inaccurate information, in spite of the obvious fact that it's impossible for me to determine what T.S. Eliot is saying.

If you're going to speculate, where does "avoiding inaccurate information" fit in?

I would speculate that the title is a collage of Biblical books (which is a fantastic observation BTW) and compare what the Gerontion and the Bible portray in common. I guarantee that your assignment will stand out like crazy

 

[ppar3566]

My words of caution would be that you are the spectator to which the poem should speak and thus the danger becomes that in the fear of not understanding you impose an interpretation upon the poem that is understandable to you (i.e. you speak to the poem rather than the other way around). So while the idea of the bible and the poem is instantly appealing (and possible illuminating) because it provides a framework for understanding I wonder whether it does complete justice to the poem itself. I know it is cold comfort when you have an assignment on it but i would take pleasure in the fact you dont understand. You are the spectator not the meaning maker and as such I think the best means of writting an assignment is to persever slowly and resist the temptation to place an interpretation on the poem due to your fear of not understanding.

P.S. how good is this second half of the forth stanza:
Think
Neither fear nor courage saves us. Unnatural vices
Are fathered by our heroism. Virtues
Are forced upon us by our impudent crimes.
These tears are shaken from the wrath-bearing tree.

What I am trying to say is best expressed by this quote:
The work of art [poetry is in included as a form of art, if not the best form of art in this essay] is to dominate the spectator: the spectator is not to dominate the work of art. The spectator is to be receptive. He is to be the violin on which the master is to play. And the more he can suppress his own silly views, his own prejudices, his own ideas of what Art should be or should not be, the more likely he is to understand and appreciate the work of art in question - Oscar Wilde

 

[Amicus Dei of [FoG]]

And the beginning of that quotation loses me. I'm a control freak, so I don't want art controlling me.
You'll probably notice that I prefer creating and performing rather than reading and listening. In fact, sadly enough, my SAT scores showed that I can't read but I can write (610 Reading, 740 Writing)...
I would rather toy with ideas for my own music on piano than listen to a symphony orchestra performance (which I did this Saturday; I nearly fell asleep on the last piece, which was apparently the longest piece of music I've ever heard).
And I really try to avoid learning from other artists as much as possible, because what I see I will generally emulate and my true art is never found. There's a piano piece I'm coming up with now that's entirely unlike anything I can recall ever hearing, so it's apparently of my own creation (and I enjoy it so much; it's beautiful). Not to say that nobody's done it before, I just don't know of any influence that has led me to come up with it.

Also, from what I've been told, I'm generally right about the poem. What worries me is that I'll read into it WAY too much and stray away on a tangent for 10 minutes. (Not once was the Biblical allusion in the title mentioned, and I was given evidence [pronunciation: hard G, tion = 'tee on' not 'shun'] which appears to defeat that clame.

EDIT: However, I am probably going to be expected to talk about a selection from the poem [the third stanza] for 15 minutes tomorrow. I think I'll blow off the assignment and try to go impromptu on how much juxtaposition and such I see in it.

 

[ppar3566]

I would rather toy with ideas for my own music on piano than listen to a symphony orchestra performance (which I did this Saturday; I nearly fell asleep on the last piece, which was apparently the longest piece of music I've ever heard).
And I really try to avoid learning from other artists as much as possible, because what I see I will generally emulate and my true art is never found. There's a piano piece I'm coming up with now that's entirely unlike anything I can recall ever hearing, so it's apparently of my own creation (and I enjoy it so much; it's beautiful). Not to say that nobody's done it before, I just don't know of any influence that has led me to come up with it.

lol you actually brought up almost word for word the very point that Oscar Wilde is trying to make in the essay I quoted. Paraphrasing - Art should be made for the joy of the person who makes it without reference to the wants and desires of anybody else, the moment artist trys to be like someone else or tries to give the public what it wants it ceases to be art (make of that what you will). The essay is called "The Soul of Man under Socialism" and if you can get past the socialist fervour (which I think is a little tongue in cheek) you may find it interesting.

Anyways by way of encouragement I sent my wife this poem as she did several graduate course on poetry and did an internship with Heat magazine (a poetry and literature journal) and she said it was a real tough poem due to ...(I didn't understand what she was talking about so I can't repeat it here for you).

P.S. Many of the TV shows we watch are American and they always talk about SATs. What are these things and how do I interprete what is good or bad. TV shows tend to say something along the lines of Johny got XXX on his SATs hehehe and I sit there and go what does that mean.

 

[Amicus Dei of [FoG]]

SAT is the most common of two college entrance level exams (most if not all colleges in the U.S. won't accept you without taking either the SAT or ACT). The highest score in each test subject is 800, so for the test I took had a grand total of 2400 possible points (the one that existed before about 2 or 3 years ago contained only 2 categories, for a total of 1600 points). I think the average score is like 1200 or 1300 on the 2400 scale (it used to be about 800 or 900 before the writing section was added).
So I scored 740/800 on writing,
700/800 on mathematics,
and 610/800 in critical reading.

This basically says to a college that I've got some sort of disorder with my literacy. Generally people read better than they write (because reading is pretty much a pre-requisite to writing).
I even surprised myself; I thought I wrote a terrible essay and the math sections were all easy... wrong again!